Home / Minnesota / Sauk Centre
425 N Elm Street, Sauk Centre, MN 56378 · Stearns County · (320) 352-2221
60 certified beds, about 52 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1986
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 245341 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 5, 2026, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Minnesota average is 7.1, the national average 9.2).
Of 13 health citations since February 2024, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.44 hours per resident per day, against 4.19 across Minnesota and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.75 of those hours.
100.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Minnesota average 42.2%).
CMS links it to Cura, an affiliated group of 8 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 13 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with dignity and respect for 1 of 3 residents (R26) reviewed for dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected the resident's clinical status for 1 of 3 residents (R3) reviewed for MDS accuracy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and document review, the facility failed to comprehensively develop a resident care plan for 1 of 1 resident (R48) reviewed for pain management. Findings Include: R48's diagnoses report, print date 3/5/26, included the following: other displaced den's fractures (a break in the upward bony projection of the second cervical vertebra, causing severe neck pain and instability), cervicalgia (pain in the cervical spine (neck), sprain of right acromioclavicular joint (located at the top of the shoulder). R48's quarterly minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R48 was independent with activities of daily living, frequently experienced pain, with a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) of 13 - cognitively intact. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were revised to reflect current conditions and interventions for 1 of 2 residents (R13) reviewed for Enhanced Barrier Precautions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented to prevent potential contamination of oxygen equipment when oxygen tubing was observed lying on the floor with the nasal cannula prongs touching the floor for 1 of 2 residents (R3) reviewed for infection control.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered to the correct resident for 1 of 1 resident (R35) reviewed for medication errors. This failure resulted in actual harm for R35 when she had a fall, sustaining a minor head injury, developed tachycardia (abnormally fast heart rate) and became hypertensive (abnormally high blood pressure) which required ongoing monitoring in the emergency department (ED). The facility had implemented appropriate corrective action prior to the onsite investigation, therefore the deficiency is being cited at past non-compliance.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and document review, the facility failed to ensure the required nurse staffing information was posted daily for 3 of 3 days reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 48 residents residing in the facility, visitors and staff who may wish to view the information.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive, person-centered care plan was developed, accurate, and revised to assure assessed care needs were implemented for 1 of 2 residents (R6) reviewed for urinary tract infections (UTI).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medication regimens were free of unnecessary psychotropic drugs for 3 of 6 (R20, R43 and R6) residents reviewed who had orders for antianxiety medications beyond 14 days without documented rational.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide timely results of x-rays services for 3 of 3 residents (R1, R2, R3) reviewed for timely diagnostic services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to document assessments that occur during pressure ulcer dressing changes to include measurements and visual data and have a system to ensure appropriate reporting with findings and follow up occurred when the need for a more thorough assessment was identified for 1 of 1 resident (R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure resident's physician and responsible parties were notified in a timely manner for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed for notification of change, who had increasing depression and had attempted to harm self.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure the completed quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) was accurately coded to reflect hospice services for 1 of 1 resident (R10) reviewed for MDS' accuracy.
5 fire safety citations on file: 2 on March 5, 2026, 1 on April 10, 2025, 2 on February 14, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Minnesota | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.44 | 4.19 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.75 | 1.06 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.74 | 3.71 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 3.02 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.67 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 100.0% | 42.2% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 100.0% | 38.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS expects 3.33 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.72 on weekdays and 3.74 on weekends, 21% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.38 in April to June 2025 to 4.44 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.44 | 0.75 | 4.72 | 3.74 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 52 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.02 | 0.69 | 4.26 | 3.41 | 0.2% | 0 of 92 | 51 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.18 | 0.87 | 4.45 | 3.49 | 0.4% | 0 of 92 | 48 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.38 | 0.82 | 4.67 | 3.62 | 2.1% | 0 of 91 | 49 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Minnesota, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.19 | 1.05 | 4.38 | 3.73 | 5.2% | 0.8% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minnesota, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.44 | $19.39 to $23.72 | 29,120 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $30.65 | $28.83 to $34.26 | 12,840 |
| Registered nurses | $48.80 | $42.76 to $55.17 | 70,110 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Minnesota | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.7 | 18.2 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.3 | 2.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 4.0 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 1.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 23.8 | 20.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.6 | 5.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 17.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 28.3 | 23.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.4 | 14.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.5 | 1.9 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Cura of Sauk Centre's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Minnesota: 66 better, 14 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 7 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 10.7% · Minnesota: 0 better, 0 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 10 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Minnesota: 2 better, 0 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 9 eligible stays.
44.4% this home
Median of homes: Minnesota57.8% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 27 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Minnesota0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 28 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Minnesota2.0% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 28 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Minnesota98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 5 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: CURA OF SAUK CENTRE LLC. CMS links this home to Cura, a group of 8 nursing homes averaging 2.5 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cura | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 10/29/2024 |
| Dirkes, Mark | Corporate director | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| Opatz, Tom | Corporate director | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| Opatz, Tom | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| Struzyk, Fred | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| Tf Management LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/29/2024 | |
| Ellerbroek, Amanda | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| Leighton, Christopher | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/28/2025 | |
| Molitor, Dave | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| Sayovitz, James | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| City of Sauk Centre | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/29/2024 | |
| Cura | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/29/2024 | |
| Tf Management LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/31/2025 | |
| Molitor, Dave | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/29/2024 | |
| Sayovitz, James | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/29/2024 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Minnesota. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.